High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/40/2016dismissed

Kavita Walia v. Punjab Agro Industries Corporation Ltd. & ANR

2016-12-06Mr. Justice S.P. Bangarh2 pages

Manoj Kumar 2016.12.07 15:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP No.40 of 2016 #1#

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND

HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.40 of 2016 Date of Order: 06.12.2016 Kavita ....Petitioner

Versus

Punjab Agro Industries Corp. Ltd and another ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH

Present:

None for the petitioner.

Mr. Anupam Singla, Advocate for the respondents. JASWANT SINGH, J (ORAL) The petitioner was discharging her duties as Plinth Incharge at District Office Patiala. Because of the allegations of causing loss of Rs.39,67,96,125/- due to being negligent in performing her duties, she was charge sheeted vide order dated 29.4.2014 (P.1) and Manjit Singh, Chief Manager, Law (Retd.) Markfed was appointed as Inquiry Officer on 16.12.2014. Before the Inquiry Officer could submit his report after conducting some proceedings, a letter/notice dated 01/08.06.2015 (P.5) was issued by the Punjab Agro Industries Corporation-respondent No.1 whereby another Inquiry Officer, named, Sh. G.S. Bhatia, Chief Manager (Retd), Markfed was appointed in place of aforesaid Manjit Singh. Thus, the petitioner has laid challenge to the impugned order (P.5) on the ground that de novo inquiry could not be conducted by the second Inquiry Officer.

It transpires that, however, the earlier Inquiry Officer submitted his report dated 24.7.2015 (P.6) exonerating the

CWP No.40 of 2016 #2# petitioner of the charges before the second Inquiry Officer could proceed afresh in the matter, hence the present writ petition is preferred challenging the impugned order (P.5). Upon notice, a reply has been filed contesting the claim of the petitioner.

At the time of hearing today, learned counsel for respondents submits that the present writ petition has become infructuous in view of the subsequent decision of the Competent Authority whereby inquiry report (P.6) has been accepted and the charge sheet dated 29.4.2014 (P.1) itself stands dropped. In view of the aforesaid statement, present petition is dismissed having been rendered infructuous.

December 06, 2016 (JASWANT SINGH) manoj JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No